A new analysis shows that Amazon's Appstore for Android is a far more profitable avenue for developers on an active-user basis than Google Play, though Apple's iOS App Store remains the market leader.

Analytics firm Flurry revealed in a new blog post on Friday that Amazon's competing Android Appstore is much better at generating revenue from mobile applications than Google's own first-party Android market, which is now under the Google Play umbrella.

Because Apple is the market leader, Flurry set Apple's App Store revenue at a value of 100 percent. The figures from a number of leading, cross-platform applications also available on the Amazon Appstore and Google Play were then compared to Apple's App Store. In this normalized comparison, Amazon's Appstore made 89 percent of the revenue that the same software did on Apple's App Store on an active-user basis, while Google Play made just 23 percent.

In other words, for every dollar in revenue generated from Apple's iOS App Store, the Amazon Appstore for Android brings in 89 cents per active user, while Google Play earns 23 cents for software available at all three storefronts. The applications included in the comparison make most of their money from in-app purchases, which was the revenue type compared in the analysis.

"Amazon, who forked Android in order to put customers into their own shopping experience on the Kindle Fire, is showing its commerce strength, already delivering more than three times the revenue in its app store compared to what Google delivers developers," Flurry's Peter Farago wrote.

The statistics come from 11 million daily active users of top-ranked applications available on iOS, Amazon and Android. They were measured over a 45-day period, between January and February of 2012.

Flurry's statistics are only the latest evidence of Google's struggles to command the kind of revenue for developers that Apple has seen on its iOS platform. The firm also issued a report in December that showed similar results, with Android earning 24 cents for every dollar earned at Apple's App Store.

But the latest figures are the first to also include the Amazon Appstore, and suggest that Amazon has been far more successful at convincing its users to pay for mobile software than Google.

Further demonstrating how profitable Apple's iOS platform is, another analysis issued on Thursday revealed that Google earns 80 percent of its mobile revenue from Apple's iPhone and iPad, while just 20 percent of mobile revenue came from its own Android platform.

I don't believe them. There's no way Amazon had 89% of Apple's revenue if they were counting the same things. I suspect that there's a difference in what's being counted. For example, Amazon's numbers may include eBook sales while Apple's do not.

Doesn't seem right. I would think there are a lot fewer Android devices that access the Amazon store than iOS devices that access the Apple App Store, mostly Amazon's own devices like the Fire. So with much fewer devices, they can generate 89% of the revenue Apple does? Sounds like every Fire user must be pouring money out to Amazon.

I don't believe them. There's no way Amazon had 89% of Apple's revenue if they were counting the same things. I suspect that there's a difference in what's being counted. For example, Amazon's numbers may include eBook sales while Apple's do not.

I don't believe ANY of them. No one doubts Apple is very far ahead. Beyond that everything else is based on guesses, assumptions, estimations or unverifiable and easily skewed information looking for clicks and eyeballs.

I don't believe them. There's no way Amazon had 89% of Apple's revenue if they were counting the same things. I suspect that there's a difference in what's being counted. For example, Amazon's numbers may include eBook sales while Apple's do not.

I thought of that, and if it were averaged out per device, but I have no way knowing if the specifics so while it seems highly suspect I'll still give a golf clap to the impressive numbers shown here.

So the two main Android app stores generate more revenue than Apple's AppStore? Developers can make money from Android? This should be an odd one to explain. I've always understood developer's can't make money with Android. Instead it looks like if you offer your app to both Google Play and the Amazon Appstore for Android you might make more than you could with Apple.

I don't believe ANY of them. No one doubts Apple is very far ahead. Beyond that everything else is based on guesses, assumptions, estimations or unverifiable and easily skewed information looking for clicks and eyeballs.

Apple periodically announces their numbers publicly -- and there are some legal restrictions to fudging of these numbers by top executives...so I tend to believe them.

@jragosta suggests that Amazon's numbers could include ebooks... they could could even include ebooks for the Amazon non-tablet eInk readers.

I really doubt that (Amazon plus Google App Stores) sell half as much as the iTunes App store...

Just my considered opinion!

it does seem exceptionally unlikely. If Amazon and/or Google were paying out substantially to developers then I'd expect them to note it the way Google likes to note Android activations. Activations can indicate that a platform but paying out billions to developers that are close to or above what Apple pays to developers would be proof.

So the two main Android app stores generate more revenue than Apple's AppStore? Developers can make money from Android? This should be an odd one to explain. I've always understood developer's can't make money with Android. Instead it looks like if you offer your app to both Google Play and the Amazon Appstore for Android you might make more than you could with Apple.

Strange indeed.

In order to get a DAU (data analysis unit) Flurry has to be installed in the app right? The numbers don't come from Apple, Google, and Amazon directly. Each developer has to sign up for the Flurry service. The numbers are meaningless unless you know the ratio of each platform's adoption of the Flurry program.

I don't believe them. There's no way Amazon had 89% of Apple's revenue if they were counting the same things. I suspect that there's a difference in what's being counted. For example, Amazon's numbers may include eBook sales while Apple's do not.

Same thought here. These numbers make no sense. There's must be something missing from the story.

Another thing to consider is that the article talks about the Amazon store's profitability for developers, which this doesn't address. Particularly with amazon giving their apps away for free whenever it feels like it, Amazon's profitability and developer's profitability don't necessarily go hand in hand.

Doesn't make sense at all. There must be at least 10x the number of iOS devices out there compared to the Kindle Fire, and, not trying to fan the flames but the iOS app store is worlds better than the Amazon app store, and Amazon has a fraction of the selection. (I have both, Amazon Apps are janky at best) Unless I'm missing how this data was collected, there's no way in hell Amazon is pulling 89% of whatever Apple is.

A - Impressive numbers for Amazon, a store only a few months old. (if true or not skewd)

B - I love the Amazon App store, I have both on my Gallaxy SII LTE and use the Amazon far more, and do not mind spending money there because it is tied to my Amazon account and very easy and straight forward, like iTunes.

We examine a basket of top-ranked apps that have similar presence across iOS, Amazon and Android. Their primary business models are in-app purchase, which is the revenue type we compare for this analysis. Combined, these apps average 11 million daily active users (DAUs). We measured their revenue over a 45-day period, from mid-January through the end of February 2012.

I don't have any experience with Android or Amazon app stores, but lots of experience with the iTunes app store -- we have 870 iOs apps across 5 iPhones and 7 iPads, with 5 people ages 12, 13, 16 47, 72.

In my opinion, the use of "in-app purchases" doesn't represent the way the majority of apps in the iTunes store are "sold".

I have read, that many apps for Android are offered as a free "starter" app with few functions/levels -- then upgradeable to the full app with in-app purchases.

Aside from games, I have used few iOS apps that are "sold" this way -- rather a free "lite" version and a separate, fee "full" version.

If that's the case, than this study is artificially skewed towards a few, popular, "in-app-purchase" apps -- and does not represent a valid comparison of the stores.

Doesn't make sense at all. There must be at least 10x the number of iOS devices out there compared to the Kindle Fire, and, not trying to fan the flames but the iOS app store is worlds better than the Amazon app store, and Amazon has a fraction of the selection. (I have both, Amazon Apps are janky at best) Unless I'm missing how this data was collected, there's no way in hell Amazon is pulling 89% of whatever Apple is.

Understand the Amazon App store is not limited to the Fire, it is open to all Android devices. I use it all the time on my phone.

"We examine a basket of top-ranked apps that have similar presence across iOS, Amazon and Android. Their primary business models are in-app purchase, which is the revenue type we compare for this analysis. Combined, these apps average 11 million daily active users (DAUs). We measured their revenue over a 45-day period, from mid-January through the end of February 2012."

If I were to interpret this, the conclusion I would draw is:

If you design a top-ranked app that has the same number of users on iOS, Amazon and Android, for every $1 the app makes on and iOS device, it generates $0.89 from an Amazon device and $0.23 from an Android device for in-app purchase.

So yes, if you happen to have an app that is top-ranked AND have "similar" numbers, that is the case. You also don't include the purchase price of the app itself. You can even argue for this type of app, Android-based devices make more money than iOS for in-app purchases. As for how many apps fit the criteria, we don't know. This isn't representative of the App Store as a whole, as many other reports have said Apple store generates more revenue, it's only if you have a 'similar presence' do the number look like they do from the chart.

This is very convoluted IMO. What size is the basket? how many apps fit the bill? what if you include the original app purchase price? How about Ads?

Another thing to consider is that it would be very unusual for Apple to participate in the Flurry program and Apple is probably the most successful developer on the iOS App Store, so those numbers would be excluded right off the bat.

Another thing to consider is that it would be very unusual for Apple to participate in the Flurry program and Apple is probably the most successful developer on the iOS App Store, so those numbers would be excluded right off the bat.

In order to get a DAU (data analysis unit) Flurry has to be installed in the app right? The numbers don't come from Apple, Google, and Amazon directly. Each developer has to sign up for the Flurry service. The numbers are meaningless unless you know the ratio of each platform's adoption of the Flurry program.